Oktava MKL-2500
Oktava MKL-2500

All user reviews for the Oktava MKL-2500

Average Score: 4.7 ( 4.7/5 based on 4 reviews )
  2 reviews 50 %
  1 user review 25 %
Not satisfied with this review?Request a new review
eric fenson 04/03/2012

eric fenson's review (This content has been automatically translated from English) " depressant"

!

OVERALL OPINION

I have 50 years of music behind me I bought all the imaginable microphones
stc t bone until 1100 Neumann U47 and I'm not telling you all, I have a sympathy
caring for microphones from China
I had the misfortune to buy the Oktava mkl 2500 micro lamp has it not coming from china

it is inconceivable that we can sell this mic in France!
how professionals have not noticed that the sound is completely
smothered, that too many frequencies are missing, that heat is actually a jumble of sound and fair even on a sm58 sound is clear,
This mic is really depressant; we want to put a trash
Fortunately for me I recommend the seller for his fair play has taken me
I could not see myself selling it in Audiofanzine!
Bernard Ancèze 01/24/2008

Bernard Ancèze's review (This content has been automatically translated from English)

4
Lamps, cardio or low-cut or pad. The construction seems slight, but he resists.

OVERALL OPINION

The MKL 2500 is a good microphone, almost very good, no glaring aberration, not dominant color, good output level. The bass and mid-bass lacks definition. It will benefit women's voices, the soprano and alto sax, flutes etc ... Piano, acoustic guitar = middle, the string quartet I like, acute and severe defined smooth. This microphone has no low-cut, or cut and a single directional, cardio. And that's a fair bit because, while it has no major fault he did not very strong personality (the medal and its reverse). Not easy to place, take his time. In production situation you do not always take time to overcome the defects of the material. It could compete with a U89 or C414, but there is always something wrong. Missing the low-cut, too far, too close, it's almost but not entirely satisfactory. Becaufe it is gasping senses that the good result is not far. For a few € more I much prefer a more comprehensive and easy C414 or 3 times as much, Of course the U89, but it is a micro already very interesting.
U-FLYstudio 10/25/2006

U-FLYstudio's review (This content has been automatically translated from English)

5
Tube microphone cardio
basic, without filter or attenuator,

* When you open it is just a small lamp, a small output transformer, resistors 2 and 3 condos, that's it! not integrated or other devices that are found widely in Rode, MXL, for example !!!!!!

Small Power LED on the front of the microphone
PSU comes with molded plastic case
a 6-pin cable too short (that's stupid !!!!) not even enough to go off a foot pole to the ground!! which could be as stupid or greedy!!
have to find six pairs cable with XLR male and female NC 6 Sucks! galley is in addition to weld!

OVERALL OPINION

- An extraordinary for the price, full, rich and natural, and very alive, it's going really something ....
biensur as is "Furt" was a medium in the presence of "colored" but is not this hope even conveyed by any good tube microphone! and here the color in the medium is far more qualified and happy as the Neumann M147, for example ... hum hum!
- A very good signal / noise ratio, a high SPL,
- No mechanical noise unlike the noisy 219 and 319 K.
- Superb recovery: acoustic guitar, piano, voice, cello, bass, guitar amp.

I find this mic actually quite "BLUES" in the sound, so warm and cozy!
it does not attempt to copy a very specific micro, and that's why he is in my park real personnaluté the same as a U87, a Beyer ribbon or C 414 ...
Furt 06/25/2006

Furt's review (This content has been automatically translated from English)

5
Tube microphone is very basic: no pad or low-cut filter, cardioid only. The cable connecting the microphone to food is far too short. In addition, the fastening system of the machine is DIY, on the suspension SM 319 (not supplied with the MKL 2500 at the time when I bought it), it is too small for the diameter of the micro and a strength more than suspicious. SM should be used much stronger spider (which may also be suitable for the Neuman TLM 103).
The body of the micro seems light and made with the same alloy as the MK 319 and 219, which can generate unpleasant resonances.
All this does not cause tremendous confidence in the quality of manufacture.

OVERALL OPINION

During the first weeks of use, this microphone has not raised my enthusiasm: I found it too bright, too sensitive to the sound atmosphere of the room and not quite homogeneous.

And then over time it became. He lost some of its shine and gained consistency. It has become an excellent sound man with a serious and a medium bodied, this well an acute but delicate. He gives her a smooth and very loyal. It sounds beautifully in front of the strings: classical guitar, violin, cello, wood clarinet, saxophone, flute, but also piano and harpsichord.
I think its very good output level and SPL enough.
I use it as often as circumstances permit.

As for the quality / price ratio, I do not know what to say. There are almost 3 years I paid for this microphone just over 300 Euros, at that price, it was a gift, but Oktava online quickly increased its prices first at nearly 500E and then A few weeks ago, at 739th. I think the MKL2500 is now too expensive because of Chinese competition is growing in quality. I try now a T-Bone SCT2000 (tube + 8 directional), which has serious arguments, although for the moment, it seems slightly behind the MKL2500 (but it only costs 299E).
I want to buy a second MKL2500, but not at the price arbitrarily fixed by Oktava online.